Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038

Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038

There are 24182 comments on the Psychology Today story from Apr 25, 2012, titled Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038. In it, Psychology Today reports that:

My blog posts on religion have attracted a lot of controversy. Religious people are annoyed by my claim that belief in God will go the way of horse transportation, and for much the same reason, specifically an improved standard of living.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Psychology Today.

Lincoln

Fort Lauderdale, FL

#10944 Jan 22, 2013
Reason Personified wrote:
<quoted text>The theist has theism, the atheist doesn't. Satanist are not atheist, anyone with any type of theism, is not atheist.
All newborns, toddlers and most children are atheist. All are right up until they are indoctrinated, then they are atheist no more. Sunday school's primary purpose: converting atheist to theist at the most vulnerable time of their lives. It's easier to scare children than adults.
Btw, teaching a toddler that Jesus loves him, is an effective lie. But then teaching him that god would make his parents eat him, would sort of defeat the purpose wouldn't it? He'd have no future goal of supporting the spell casters. He'd be much more likely to run screaming from that church, and let those lazy clergy get up and get a job.
So do you get yet that atheism is but the lack of theism? The atheist just not theist? And there are no criteria to be met in not being theist. You simply aren't, until you are. Nothing more to it.
"All newborns, toddlers and most children are atheist"
.....rather desperate generalization :-)

You
have
scientific
data
to
back
this ?
Thinking

Leighton Buzzard, UK

#10945 Jan 22, 2013
Which gives my society no pleasure at all.
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
But many men do get pleasure from rape, otherwise, why do they do it?

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

#10946 Jan 22, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually that is not true.
As an atheist is merely someone who denies the knowledge of God, that has been revealed to him, then an atheist does not in reality exist beyond the realm of lies in their own mind.
You of course define atheism holding the lie to be a truth.
I define it by the truth.
As an Atheist, I believe that a lost being akin to youself simply could not be so thick/dense & absolutely full of BS without practicing 24/7 over a life-time. You would be well advised to research the definition of the word "Atheist" prior to insulting the intelligence of an unborn gnat with your current assumption of the word. I'm a DEVOUT Atheist, and DO NOT harbour any lies in my mind re the none existence of ANY deity what-so-ever. I abhor the fact that you have the right to suggest I do. IF there is ANYTHING in your scrotum, you would apologize in your very next post. That though, would be your first post with any amount of thinking in it.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#10947 Jan 22, 2013
William Tyndale wrote:
<quoted text>
Appreciating nature is a good thing. But I was referring to the underlining mystery, the glue that holds the complexity of what is together.
Try to picture nothingness. No space, no time, no consciousness. Nothing.
Now try to explain it's opposite and how it came to be. Cant? This is the mystery. We are the product of whatever this mystery is.
Here's the trick: when you have this experience, don't go jumping to magical conclusions involving ghosts, which would not be much more sophisticated than looking at volcano erupting or even a leaf blowing by, and attributing agency to it.

But why would you think that such apperceptions elude atheists, especially those of us that are also secular humanists, and most especially those trained in philosophy and the sciences? Did somebody teach you that we were shallow? I wouldn't be surprised.

Christians, who claim a monopoly on truth, morality, and spirituality for themselves, teach that we have no basis for ethical behavior, no meaning or purpose to our lives, are fools, rebellious, egotistical - you know the litany.

I hope that you aren't learning about people like me from people like that.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#10948 Jan 22, 2013
Thinking wrote:
Which gives my society no pleasure at all.
<quoted text>
But it gave others societies pleasure, where they acting immorally if they defined their own standard?

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#10949 Jan 22, 2013
jacktheladat1 wrote:
<quoted text>As an Atheist, I believe that a lost being akin to youself simply could not be so thick/dense & absolutely full of BS without practicing 24/7 over a life-time. You would be well advised to research the definition of the word "Atheist" prior to insulting the intelligence of an unborn gnat with your current assumption of the word. I'm a DEVOUT Atheist, and DO NOT harbour any lies in my mind re the none existence of ANY deity what-so-ever. I abhor the fact that you have the right to suggest I do. IF there is ANYTHING in your scrotum, you would apologize in your very next post. That though, would be your first post with any amount of thinking in it.
Sorry, the Bible disagrees with you, it says you do know God, but that you have denied and suppressed that truth so that you can carry on living a sinful life.

I base my worldview on the Bible, not your opinion.

As to why I should apologise, are you saying there is an absolute standard of morality you are pointing to, which I should adhere to?

And do you also think that the atheists on this thread that have insulted christians, should also apologise based on that same absolute standard?

No?

I thought not...

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#10950 Jan 22, 2013
Lincoln wrote:
"Survey after survey shows decline in religious belief .." not really...may be valid on topix threads. Produce the polls?
I just did. Did you see them?
http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/atheism/T...
Lincoln wrote:
.... free exercise of religion!
That won't change under humanist cultural hegemony. You'll still be free to nail a chicken to a stick, anoint it with sheep blood, affix jingly bells to it, and shake it over your head at the full moon if that's what gives your life meaning, moral grounding, and a framework for understanding the universe. Go for it!

But your religious life should be as just as private as your sex life and your financial situation. Just keep your severed chicken parts and jingly bells off the money and out of the Pledge, don't try to prevent gay people from marrying because the chicken doesn't approve, and unless happiness for you requires that you scapegoat somebody or otherwise impose your religious values on unbelievers, we can all be happy.

Since: Apr 09

Location hidden

#10951 Jan 22, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
It does if you let the Bible explain it.
Man has been in rebellion since Eve's sin in the Garden of Eden.
Since that time, mankind has been trying to suppress the knowledge of God.
Usually by lying to themselves and convincing themselves the lie is true.
They got so successful that at one point, God flooded the earth.
They are also getting to the same point again, which is a sign that Jesus Second Coming is about here.
As in the days of Noah etc...
So it all makes perfect sense.
It boggles the mind that people still believe this is literally true...

“Leave That Thing Alone!”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#10952 Jan 22, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
Would that be the same as the atheistic religion, which attributes everything to a rockdidit?
Because you have to assert the same principle and then test it logically.
Of course if you reject this basic fundamental logical truth, you have just denied your own worldview...
There is no such thing as an "atheistic religion"... but then you already know that. Your need to try and equate atheism to your religion is quite telling. BTW... as an atheist, I am perfectly comfortable in saying "I don't know" to something for which I have no real knowledge of. I don't feel the need to attribute things I don't know about to some 'god' and claiming it "truth". THAT is the purview of the overly religious and their deep seated need to feel "special". It must really suck to have to try and drag everything else down to your level in order to make yourself feel somehow superior. I can tell you really don't believe in your 'god' as much as you claim. If you did, lying to support your views would be something you'd be deathly afraid of since bearing false witness is one of the Top 10 no-no's

Since: Apr 09

Location hidden

#10953 Jan 22, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually that is not true.
As an atheist is merely someone who denies the knowledge of God, that has been revealed to him, then an atheist does not in reality exist beyond the realm of lies in their own mind.
You of course define atheism holding the lie to be a truth.
I define it by the truth.
You must be doing some awesome drugs to write nonsensical BS like that...

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#10954 Jan 22, 2013
mtimber wrote:
What if committing rape gives people pleasure in the society? What then? If pleasure is the deciding factor, as you have stated.
Pleasure is not the deciding factor, and pleasure for one at the expense of another is most definitely not a part of the humanist moral calculus.
Henry

Hartenstein, Germany

#10955 Jan 22, 2013
Clint wrote:
The utopian state of the authors hypothesis necessary to achieve his prediction is little more than wishful thinking. The nature of humanity is diametrically opposed to harmony.
We are in the atomic age, which means the suicidal effect of capitalism is perhaps the end of mankind. Capitalism and war are twins and the superprofit through war are unavoidable! AKWs are never without fatal effects.
Henry

Hartenstein, Germany

#10956 Jan 22, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
The evidence for God is self attesting.
If He did not exist, you would not be able to account for reason, you would not be able to account for morality and would not be able to account for scientific processes.
Of course, there was never a single god among the thausands of gods which were myths nothing else!

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#10957 Jan 22, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
So is rape morally wrong in a society that practices rape?
I notice your empathy to non atheists is lacking, are you waiting for that to evolve?:-)
How much empathy are you looking for?

I'll tell you what: I promise to ALWAYS exceed your church's empathy for unbelievers. Here's some now :

[1] "The fool says in his heart,'There is no God.' They are corrupt, their deeds are vile; there is no one who does good" - Psalm 14:1

[2] "But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone." - Revelation 21:8 And the result of such hate speech is predictable:

I'm not sure that I buy into the expectation that unbelievers unilaterally show respect to Christians whose holy bible calls us fools, no good, corrupt, abominable, the moral equivalent of murderers and whoremongers, and fit for to me dropped conscious into a burning fire to suffer forever.

Wouldn't you agree that that is unreasonable to ask for our empathy?

If you consider those words holy, and authored by a perfectly loving and just god, then you've already gotten just about all of the empathy you deserve from unbelievers.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#10958 Jan 22, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
What if committing rape gives people pleasure in the society?
What then?
If pleasure is the deciding factor, as you have stated.
As with many things in morality, the pleasure of one person is balanced by the harm done to another and the necessity of that harm. In this case, the harm done is severe, the necessity low. So the morality is clearly against rape.

On the other hand, there are many species where rape seems to be a necessary aspect of reproduction, so for those species (assuming such could become conscious, another requirement for morality), rape would be moral. For example, it would be moral for intelligent spiders to eat their mates.
Lincoln

Fort Lauderdale, FL

#10960 Jan 22, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
I just did. Did you see them?
http://www.topix.com/fosm/TF67LDICTMV5DH6IL/p...
<quoted text>
That won't change under humanist cultural hegemony. You'll still be free to nail a chicken to a stick, anoint it with sheep blood, affix jingly bells to it, and shake it over your head at the full moon if that's what gives your life meaning, moral grounding, and a framework for understanding the universe. Go for it!
But your religious life should be as just as private as your sex life and your financial situation. Just keep your severed chicken parts and jingly bells off the money and out of the Pledge, don't try to prevent gay people from marrying because the chicken doesn't approve, and unless happiness for you requires that you scapegoat somebody or otherwise impose your religious values on unbelievers, we can all be happy.
Funny using topix as a source.:---)

Voted for Obama, who is also a Christian.

Atheists 5% of the population
surging toward 5.5%.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#10961 Jan 22, 2013
mtimber wrote:
Man has been in rebellion since Eve's sin in the Garden of Eden. Since that time, mankind has been trying to suppress the knowledge of God. Usually by lying to themselves and convincing themselves the lie is true. They got so successful that at one point, God flooded the earth.
Why would anybody believe that? That flood part describes a moronic and incompetent god. He allegedly was unhappy with mankind, which he was wholly responsible for, and whose future he could allegedly see before he built them.

When they turned out to be sinful as he knew they would be, he decided to nearly sterilize the earth with an impossible rainstorm that caused the miserable and terrifying torture of not just almost all men, but almost all life.

Can you picture the puppies and kitten seeking higher ground until there was no escape, and then, while in a state of sheer terror, have the water level cover their little noses and snuff the life out of them? He could have just "poofed" them away in the manner he created them, but he preferred this.

But wait - besides being senselessly cruel, it's a stupid plan doomed to failure.

To repair the problem, that god reseeded the earth using the exact same breeding stock - a drunk and his family.

Sorry, but that's just not plausible. It's all nonsense. There never was a Noah, nor an Eve, nor a Jehovah. And there is no such thing as sin, nor any need for redemption.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#10962 Jan 22, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
What if committing rape gives people pleasure in the society?
What then?
If pleasure is the deciding factor, as you have stated.
Let me put it this way: is the only reason you don't rape because you think that some big daddy in the sky says you shouldn't? If your answer is yes, then *please* keep believing in the big daddy in the sky. You have then shown yourself incapable of true moral judgment. If your answer is no, then you have shown that morality has nothing to do with the existence of deities.
Lincoln

Fort Lauderdale, FL

#10963 Jan 22, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
How much empathy are you looking for?
I'll tell you what: I promise to ALWAYS exceed your church's empathy for unbelievers. Here's some now :
[1] "The fool says in his heart,'There is no God.' They are corrupt, their deeds are vile; there is no one who does good" - Psalm 14:1
[2] "But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone." - Revelation 21:8 And the result of such hate speech is predictable:
I'm not sure that I buy into the expectation that unbelievers unilaterally show respect to Christians whose holy bible calls us fools, no good, corrupt, abominable, the moral equivalent of murderers and whoremongers, and fit for to me dropped conscious into a burning fire to suffer forever.
Wouldn't you agree that that is unreasonable to ask for our empathy?
If you consider those words holy, and authored by a perfectly loving and just god, then you've already gotten just about all of the empathy you deserve from unbelievers.
President Obama was Very inclusive yesterday.
Did he mention atheists?

Since: Mar 11

Scottsburg, IN

#10964 Jan 22, 2013
Oh sht are you really trying the Eric Hovind absolute argument? Sorry retard about a dozen idiots before you have tried the same lameness so don't bother humiliating yourself.
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
But you accept their are absolute universal laws of logic?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Atheism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
The Dumbest Thing Posted by a Godbot (Jun '10) 1 hr IB DaMann 5,722
Athetists' best bet is that there is a God. 1 hr IB DaMann 94
bigger fish to fry (Jul '11) 3 hr Suspicious Packag... 2
What are the best arguments against religion? 3 hr Richardfs 8
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 6 hr Brian_G 23,592
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 13 hr scientia potentia... 48,864
News Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... (Oct '14) 14 hr Mintz4004 21,889
More from around the web